Space tasks

Cascadia Commons

Admins

Members

Cascadia Commons

The vision of Cascadia Commons is to foster a thriving, regional community that is economically prosperous and in harmony with the natural environment. To make this vision a reality, Cascadia Commons helps to develop and support a network of Lodges, cooperatives and programs that address the unique social, economic and environmental challenges of the Cascadia Bioregion.

Members of Cascadia Commons share a Common Bond in seeking solutions to maintain a local and bio-regional balance. We promote an organizational philosophy where Members connect to the place in which they live, finding ways to interact with its surrounding web of life. We embrace bioregional and deep ecology principles that preserve, protect, and restore the local social, natural and economic environment.

Friday, March 9

Robert Sapolsky reveals the biological basis for our most unfortunate traits—and insists change is possible.

A couple of weeks ago, at a speech before a friendly audience, President Donald Trump likened immigrants to poisonous snakes. To biologist and behavioral scientist Robert Sapolsky, it was a revolting but revealing remark.

"That's a textbook dehumanization of 'them,' he said. "If you get to the point where citing 'thems' causes your followers to activate neurons in the insular cortex—the part of the brain that responds to viscerally disgusting things—you've finished most of your to-do list for your genocide."

That sort of sharply stated, science-based analysis has made Sapolsky a popular and influential writer and thinker. A MacArthur fellow, he is a professor of biology and neurology at Stanford University, and the author of several books, including the 2017 best-seller Behave: The Biology of Humans at Our Best and Worst.

Sapolsky has spent much of his career in Kenya, studying baboons (among other primates), and he uses that knowledge to put human behavior into a broader perspective. In a recent telephone interview, he discussed the biological basis of our current political fault lines.

Tuesday, February 13

To think about how you think: "This is the art of introspection, focused on being aware of such things as one's own degree of alertness, attentiveness, bias, emotional state, exploration of interpretation options, self-assurance."************************************

"Many people choose to remain ignorant, afraid that thinking might ruin their lives. This is particularly true for people who identify themselves with ideologies."https://theunboundedspirit.com/think/

*************************************"Given that each side believes the other side is illogical (liberal example, conservative example), we first tested whether liberals and conservatives had differences in logical reasoning when they evaluated arguments without ideological content. On this task, there were no differences in logical reasoning between liberals and conservatives. In fact, both liberals and conservatives tended to label even unsound arguments as sound, illustrating difficulties with logical reasoning across partisan lines."http://www.spsp.org/news-center/blog/political-ideology-undermines-logic

****************************************"Be aware of your thinking. Explain to students the need to think about how they think. This is the art of introspection, focused on being aware of such things as one's own degree of alertness, attentiveness, bias, emotional state, exploration of interpretation options, self-assurance."

Friday, February 9

"...the primary level of organization of this commons-based society will be local. Cosmo-local (DGML = Design Global, Manufacture Local) production is governed by the following principles:

Protocol cooperativism: the underlying immaterial and algorithmic protocols are shared and open source, using copyfair principles (free sharing of knowledge, but commercialization conditioned by reciprocity)

Open cooperativism: the commons-based coops are distinguished from ‘collective capitalism’ by their commitment to creating and expanding common goods for the whole of society; in Platform coops it is the platforms themselves that are the commons, needed to enable and manage the exchanges that may be needed, while protecting it from capture by extractive netarchical platforms

Open and contributive accounting: fair distribution mechanisms that recognize all contributions

Open and shared supply chains for mutual coordination

Non-dominium forms of ownership (the means of production are held in common for the benefit of all participants in the eco-system."

Thursday, February 1

I highly recommend this podcast in light of the censorship of late: (Thanks Cherie)

Clear and Present Danger - A history of free speech

Clear and Present Danger - A history of free speech

Why have kings, emperors, and governments killed and imprisoned people to shut them up? And why have countless people risked death and imprisonment to express their beliefs? Jacob Mchangama guides you through the history of free speech from the trial of Socrates to the Great Firewall.

Why have kings, emperors, and governments killed and imprisoned people to shut them up? And why have countless people risked death and imprisonment to express their beliefs? Jacob Mchangama guides you through the history of free speech from the trial of Socrates to the Great Firewall.

I highly recommend this podcast in light of the censorship of late: (Thanks Cherie)

Clear and Present Danger - A history of free speech

Why have kings, emperors, and governments killed and imprisoned people to shut them up? And why have countless people risked death and imprisonment to express their beliefs? Jacob Mchangama guides you through the history of free speech from the trial of Socrates to the Great Firewall.

Only 13% of the world’s 7,4 billion people enjoy free speech. 45% live in countries where censorship is the norm. Still, more than half the world’s population across cultures and continents think free speech is very important. But why is that? Where does the principle of free speech come from? How has it been developed over time? Why have kings, emperors, and governments killed and imprisoned people to shut them up? And why have countless people risked death and imprisonment to express their beliefs? And what can people in the digital age learn from past conflicts over where to draw the line?

Biologist David Sloan Wilson: "Any systems engineer will tell you that a complex system cannot be optimized by separately optimizing the parts. The parts and their interactions must be organized with the performance of the whole system in mind. If so, then collective intelligence at the global scale requires policies that are formulated with the welfare of the whole earth in mind. Nothing else will do and the concept that each nation can pursue a “my nation first” policy is collective idiocy."

Friday, December 29 2017

Lets liberate ALL of us from the boxes society puts upon us, not create 7 Billion boxes - one for each of us.

From the article:

"So if you want to call yourself a genderqueer femme presenting demigirl, you go for it. Express that identity however you like. Have fun with it. A problem emerges only when you start making political claims on the basis of that label – when you start demanding that others call themselves cisgender, because you require there to be a bunch of conventional binary cis people for you to define yourself against; and when you insist that these cis people have structural advantage and political privilege over you, because they are socially read as the conformist binary people, while nobody really understands just how complex and luminous and multifaceted and unique your gender identity is. To call yourself non-binary or genderfluid while demanding that others call themselves cisgender is to insist that the vast majority of humans must stay in their boxes, because you identify as boxless.

The solution is not to reify gender by insisting on ever more gender categories that define the complexity of human personality in rigid and essentialist ways. The solution is to abolish gender altogether. We do not need gender. We would be better off without it. Gender as a hierarchy with two positions operates to naturalise and perpetuate the subordination of female people to male people, and constrains the development of individuals of both sexes. Reconceiving of gender as an identity spectrum represents no improvement.

You do not need to have a deep, internal, essential experience of gender to be free to dress how you like, behave how you like, work how you like, love who you like. You do not need to show that your personality is feminine for it to be acceptable for you to enjoy cosmetics, cookery and crafting. You do not need to be genderqueer to queer gender. The solution to an oppressive system that puts people into pink and blue boxes is not to create more and more boxes that are any colour but blue or pink. The solution is to tear down the boxes altogether."

Saturday, December 2 2017

Saturday, November 25 2017

Reciprocal Rights Version 2.9 (A cobbling together of The Bill of Rights, FDR's 2nd Bill of Rights, The Declaration of Human Rights, and the Bolivian Mother Earth Law)

Reciprocal Rights Version 2.9 (A cobbling together of The Bill of Rights, FDR's 2nd Bill of Rights, The Declaration of Human Rights, and the Bolivian Mother Earth Law)

-

OK - Why? This is WHY:It has come to my attention that the Koch Brothers are making moves toward a Constitutional Convention (They are 4 state house votes away from this goal). If this happens our Bill of Rights will be dissolved. So, if this happens I want to be johnny-on-the-spot with an even more all-encompassing set of rights for the citizens. I've done my level best to compile a set of rights that is all inclusive, including the rights of nature, and leaves no one behind. So, if we lose our Bill of Rights, or the Pacific Northwest, sensing a new aristocracy, decides to leave the Union - again, I want to lobby for the most liberal of rights possible.Summary & Premise: I use the term "Reciprocal" with respect to this document of Rights because I envisioned a set of laws where every Right you claim for yourself you are required to extend that Right to all others - including Nature. I claim them all and extend them all to Everyone as defined. As written, it has a 'peer-to-peer' rights extension requirement of every citizen and public or private corporations, not simply a reservation of Rights against State power. .Suggested Additions:

+

OK - Why? This is WHY:It has come to my attention that the Koch Brothers are making moves toward a Constitutional Convention (They are 6 state house votes away from this goal at 28 states: 34 states needed). If this happens our Bill of Rights will be dissolved. So, if this happens I want to be johnny-on-the-spot with an even more all-encompassing set of rights for the citizens. I've done my level best to compile a set of rights that is all inclusive, including the rights of nature, and leaves no one behind. So, if we lose our Bill of Rights, or the Pacific Northwest, sensing a new aristocracy, decides to leave the Union - again, I...

Friday, October 27 2017

Life emerges from death. This is merely a fact from ecology — where the seemingly immortal flow of nutrients continuously passes from the bodies of the recently deceased into new forms as it is reconstituted in the bodies of the newly born.

I offer this metaphor as the starting point to discuss how we can apply biological principles to “guide the flow of nutrients” from dying institutional forms for education, research, and social change practice. In a recent article, I explained why universities are failing humanity to express that disciplinary-based solutions will not help us in a systemic-problem-based world. Only when we reorganize our efforts around the systems in question will effective interventions be found.